Long of the short of it is, Knox County Deputy is chasing a car which refused to stop for an infraction, rear-ends or t-bones an uninvolved motorist which kills an unrestrained four-year old child from head injuries sustained. You can bet this cop is toast, even though the neglect of the van driver and the criminal actions of the fleeing perp are pretty much more responsible, the typical Hoosier mindset is to ignore all that, focus on the "killer cop" and throw him in prison, throw away his career, and the life of his family.

4949shooter

09-19-2011, 13:52

This is terrible in more ways than one.

Prayers sent for the child. RIP little one.

Prayers sent for the officer.

S&WM&PAR15T&G34

09-19-2011, 13:54

Sounds like the officer failed to clear the intersection. We all know just because we are using lights and a siren it doesn't mean we can run a red light. This is a sorry case for everyone.

Brucev

09-19-2011, 15:48

This is terrible in more ways than one.

Prayers sent for the child. RIP little one.

Prayers sent for the officer.

Agree with this.

S. Kelly

09-19-2011, 16:03

NOTHING good comes from a pursuit.

dano1427

09-19-2011, 16:08

NOTHING good comes from a pursuit.

Is that including the apprehension of those crapbag felons that are fleeing the Police?

Jeff82

09-19-2011, 16:09

NOTHING good comes from a pursuit.

Not true. Most pursuits are uneventful and result in the perp getting caught.

RIP Little Guy.

CAcop

09-19-2011, 16:48

Is that including the apprehension of those crapbag felons that are fleeing the Police?

If you use a tool too much it will get taken away from you.

Around here 30-40 years ago it was known if you mouthed off to an officer you got an ass kicking. Why do you think that doesn't happen now?

Stories like this make me think that pursuits are best left for cases when you are almost justified for shooting the suspect. A pursuit that begins with a vehicle code infraction and ends with a death of an univolved person will have consequences. And they will not be positive. If you start one over a stop light violation for God's sake drive easy and don't be afraid to let the suspect go. If you fail to clear an intersection and T-bone someone you just might end up in criminal court. There have been a few officers charged and some of those convicted of manslaughter for not using due regard. I don't care home many times someone tells me I have to catch the bad guy no matter what. They aren't going to be the one explaining themselves to a jury. The people have spoken. Give them what they want. If they don't like it they can make it known on election day.

boomhower

09-19-2011, 17:52

If you use a tool too much it will get taken away from you.

Around here 30-40 years ago it was known if you mouthed off to an officer you got an ass kicking. Why do you think that doesn't happen now?

Stories like this make me think that pursuits are best left for cases when you are almost justified for shooting the suspect. A pursuit that begins with a vehicle code infraction and ends with a death of an univolved person will have consequences. And they will not be positive. If you start one over a stop light violation for God's sake drive easy and don't be afraid to let the suspect go. If you fail to clear an intersection and T-bone someone you just might end up in criminal court. There have been a few officers charged and some of those convicted of manslaughter for not using due regard. I don't care home many times someone tells me I have to catch the bad guy no matter what. They aren't going to be the one explaining themselves to a jury. The people have spoken. Give them what they want. If they don't like it they can make it known on election day.

Thing is 99.9% of the time they aren't fleeing because they are afraid of getting charged with running a light. They are afraid they are going to get charged for the stolen car, stolen gun, outstanding murder warrant, body in the trunk, etc. etc. etc. Three months a local chased a car that had run a stop sign. That's it, just a stop sign. Car fled and he pursed. A ways down the road the guy jump and ran from the car. He went to pursue but was stopped because he heard something. What he found was the kidnapped soon to be rape and murder victim in the trunk of the car. Regardless of the reason the pursuite starts, you have to engage with due safety for others. Clear your intersections, etc.

razdog76

09-19-2011, 17:58

NOTHING good comes from a pursuit.

Really?

This officer apparently didn't clear the intersection, and your best response is this? Could there possibly be another reason the violator wasn't stopping; warrant(s), contraband?

I won't even touch the part that if the child was properly in his car seat, he would likely not have been injured.

DaBigBR

09-19-2011, 18:16

If you use a tool too much it will get taken away from you.

Around here 30-40 years ago it was known if you mouthed off to an officer you got an ass kicking. Why do you think that doesn't happen now?

Stories like this make me think that pursuits are best left for cases when you are almost justified for shooting the suspect. A pursuit that begins with a vehicle code infraction and ends with a death of an univolved person will have consequences. And they will not be positive. If you start one over a stop light violation for God's sake drive easy and don't be afraid to let the suspect go. If you fail to clear an intersection and T-bone someone you just might end up in criminal court. There have been a few officers charged and some of those convicted of manslaughter for not using due regard. I don't care home many times someone tells me I have to catch the bad guy no matter what. They aren't going to be the one explaining themselves to a jury. The people have spoken. Give them what they want. If they don't like it they can make it known on election day.

Thing is 99.9% of the time they aren't fleeing because they are afraid of getting charged with running a light. They are afraid they are going to get charged for the stolen car, stolen gun, outstanding murder warrant, body in the trunk, etc. etc. etc. Three months a local chased a car that had run a stop sign. That's it, just a stop sign. Car fled and he pursed. A ways down the road the guy jump and ran from the car. He went to pursue but was stopped because he heard something. What he found was the kidnapped soon to be rape and murder victim in the trunk of the car. Regardless of the reason the pursuite starts, you have to engage with due safety for others. Clear your intersections, etc.

Really?

This officer apparently didn't clear the intersection, and your best response is this? Could there possibly be another reason the violator wasn't stopping; warrant(s), contraband?

I won't even touch the part that if the child was properly in his car seat, he would likely not have been injured.

Like it or not, CACop is pretty much spot on, at least in concept. We're not in a business where the ends get to justify the means, as much as we would like them to some time. And realize, this is coming from a guy that works for a department that lets us chase for traffic violations, and I do so with complete and total knowledge that we have just enough rope to hang ourselves with.

FWIW, I had a motorcycle take off on me this weekend over a speeding violation. Valid, registered, insured, sober, etc. Ran because he was "scared" and had just enough room to think he could make it. Two miles and less than two minutes later, his bike was wrecked and he was in custody. Had he, or I smoked a pedestrian or a passing car, it would obviously not have been good.

razdog76

09-19-2011, 18:40

Like it or not, CACop is pretty much spot on, at least in concept. We're not in a business where the ends get to justify the means, as much as we would like them to some time. And realize, this is coming from a guy that works for a department that lets us chase for traffic violations, and I do so with complete and total knowledge that we have just enough rope to hang ourselves with.

FWIW, I had a motorcycle take off on me this weekend over a speeding violation. Valid, registered, insured, sober, etc. Ran because he was "scared" and had just enough room to think he could make it. Two miles and less than two minutes later, his bike was wrecked and he was in custody. Had he, or I smoked a pedestrian or a passing car, it would obviously not have been good.

Well, there are considerations.

I am fortunate enough to work for a department with the CALEA model pursuit policy which was also adopted by OPOTA.

In it are provisions as when to terminate a pursuit, such as driving past a school when it is letting out, versus driving past it at 0230 in the morning.

I apologize for forgetting that not everyone has the same perspective as I do. I just disagree with the no pursuit policies many agencies adopted about ten years ago.

At least in central Ohio they seem to have returned to something that allows the job to get done, taking some reasonable precautions, and improved training to get the pursuit ended ASAP with Pursuit Termination Techniques.

CAcop

09-19-2011, 20:16

My agency losened our pursuit policy. We used to not be able to pursue for equipment violations. Now we can. Am I going to go balls to the wall for that? Nope. We mostly have people run because they have dope on them or in their car. Or a cheesey warrant for hug, er, drug court. Remember CA has the second most lawyers per capita in the US. What could possibly be an easier payout that suing a PD over a pursuit that ended in the death of an innocent? A death as a result of the police not using due regard. Like it or not we will get judged in court over the results of our actions versus our intent. One of our guys lost control and took out a bus bench at 0300. What would that bus bench look like at 1500?

Cav

09-19-2011, 20:32

Sounds like the guy that fled, caused a 4 year old to get killed. That should be on the criminal. The USSC tends to support police doing their job vs bad guys.

IMHO best that can be done is blame the criminal for his acts that thru causation killed a child and put others at risk.

One way to not chase so many bad guys is for judges/courts to set examples of those that flee police. Then those that flee will be known to be all or nothing criminals.

boomhower

09-19-2011, 21:24

Sounds like the guy that fled, caused a 4 year old to get killed. That should be on the criminal. The USSC tends to support police doing their job vs bad guys.

IMHO best that can be done is blame the criminal for his acts that thru causation killed a child and put others at risk.

One way to not chase so many bad guys is for judges/courts to set examples of those that flee police. Then those that flee will be known to be all or nothing criminals.

While I agree the offender fleeing and the unrestrained child are both factors, if the Officer did blow the stop sign he's pretty much screwed. You HAVE to clear your intersections.

larry_minn

09-19-2011, 21:44

Sad situation.

Personally I feel the act of running from the Police is it. It should not matter what the Officer orig. hit lights for. If you run, you have commited a host of crimes, (off top of head) "failure to obey lawful order, speeding, endangerment,"
The person running should be responsible for any injuries/damage caused by them OR pursuit. Then the courts pile on charges.

IMO that would do more to STOP dangerous chases.

shootindave

09-19-2011, 22:40

NOTHING good comes from a pursuit.

I smell brass.

State_Trooper_OSP

09-20-2011, 03:09

I smell brass.

lolz...

OLY-M4gery

09-20-2011, 06:55

My agency losened our pursuit policy. We used to not be able to pursue for equipment violations. Now we can. Am I going to go balls to the wall for that? Nope. We mostly have people run because they have dope on them or in their car. Or a cheesey warrant for hug, er, drug court. Remember CA has the second most lawyers per capita in the US. What could possibly be an easier payout that suing a PD over a pursuit that ended in the death of an innocent? A death as a result of the police not using due regard. Like it or not we will get judged in court over the results of our actions versus our intent. One of our guys lost control and took out a bus bench at 0300. What would that bus bench look like at 1500?

Yes, pursuits are fraught with peril.

You are responsible for your actions, even during a pursuit.

But, in places that have very strict pursuit policies, more people run from them knowing the police won't pursue. That makes it less safe for the public.

Also in places with very strict pursuit policies, it seems the police driving during pursuits that are allowed to continue, is actually worse than agencies that have officers with more pursuit experience.

Pursuits should be run like any other "use of force", escelate or disengage.

If 2 minutes into the pursuit it's not "worth it" to authorize/use spikes then it's not "worth it" to continue the pursuit.

If 5 minutes in spikes have been ineffective and it's not "worth it" to PIT the suspect vehicle it's not "worth it" to continue the pursuit.

Etc, etc, etc, pursuits where the police just follow behind w/o taking any action to stop the suspect from fleeing are not well thought out.

Just like during a pursuit, the primary officer, and the responsible supervisor, should be assessing whether it is worth it to continue the pursuit based on the seriousness of the violation, whether or not the offender can be caught some other way, road, traffic, weather conditions, etc. etc. At any time that pursuit can be called of by either the supervisor or the pursuing officer.

larry_minn

09-20-2011, 09:21

I knew many people in my younger days who would have "run from the Police" except for one thing. They KNEW the Police would chase, other cities would come over to help and when they caught him... Lets just say the smart thing would be for them to stop in a very public area and give up.

People do trip, fall into squad car, forget to duck head.......

Plus they might as well sell the car. From then on every time that car seen they will get a chat.

I recall one guy who tried to run. He was faster but the radio was even faster. After that he couldn't go 2mph over speed limit or he would get pulled over. When he got pulled over a couple hundred miles from home the Officer was very nice until he got the info on his running. It went from "Sir you were doing 65 in a 55 but we can call it 60" To. "Here is your ticket for 65 in a 55 press hard/three copies" (not quotes but how he explained it)

If I know they didn't get my lic plate, know they won't chase, was a criminal... WHY would I stop?

merlynusn

09-20-2011, 09:21

We had a very restrictive policy that was slightly loosened. Before we could only chase for felonies dangerous to life. Now we can chase for crimes dangerous to life. That came about because you can shoot at someone and it's a misdemeanor here as long as you don't hit the torso or head. A through and through gsw to a limb is considered a misdemeanor. So they realized that we'd get behind a car that just did a drive by and we couldn't pursue.

Can we chase for traffic violations? Nope. The one thing we can't chase that I think we should are stolen vehicles (unless it's taken in a carjacking).

But yes, absolutely, you are 100% completely responsible for your actions in a pursuit. It would be one thing if the suspect hit the van killing the 4 year old. It's quite another when the officer does it. Either the van blew the stop sign and entered the officer's path of travel or the officer did. If the officer did, then he's toast for not showing due regard.

DaBigBR

09-20-2011, 10:17

We had a very restrictive policy that was slightly loosened. Before we could only chase for felonies dangerous to life. Now we can chase for crimes dangerous to life. That came about because you can shoot at someone and it's a misdemeanor here as long as you don't hit the torso or head. A through and through gsw to a limb is considered a misdemeanor. So they realized that we'd get behind a car that just did a drive by and we couldn't pursue.

Can we chase for traffic violations? Nope. The one thing we can't chase that I think we should are stolen vehicles (unless it's taken in a carjacking).

But yes, absolutely, you are 100% completely responsible for your actions in a pursuit. It would be one thing if the suspect hit the van killing the 4 year old. It's quite another when the officer does it. Either the van blew the stop sign and entered the officer's path of travel or the officer did. If the officer did, then he's toast for not showing due regard.

Are you allowed to pursue for a suspected drunk driver? That seems to be a common exception in these parts.

Mayhem like Me

09-20-2011, 18:29

NOTHING good comes from a pursuit.

I have a question for you.

Summers eve or vinegar and water?

EOD3

09-21-2011, 05:54

Plausible denyability

Do you REALLY want the text of your post accessible to every "belly-crawling" ACLU lawyer and "ambulance-chasing" land-shark in the country?

I have two very good friends in public safety down there, one an LT with the VUPD, another is a medic with Knox County EMS. They say this officer is going to be burned at the stake. The folks in Vincennes tend to go native when these things happen. I lived a block away from where this took place, at 16th and Busseron. It is a strictly residential area. Strange place for a deputy to be, let alone kick up a pursuit.

merlynusn

09-21-2011, 09:57

Are you allowed to pursue for a suspected drunk driver? That seems to be a common exception in these parts.

It would depend on how bad it is. If it is a minor DWI? No. If it was really grossly negligent and you could tell that someone would die, maybe. You'd honestly have to get permission.

We don't like it. We know that if we let a drunk go because we can't chase and they kill someone in a wreck, that the department will lose big time. But it's not in our policy. If you did it, you'd honestly probably get a couple days off.

SCSU74

09-21-2011, 18:35

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/29227569/detail.html

Long of the short of it is, Knox County Deputy is chasing a car which refused to stop for an infraction, rear-ends or t-bones an uninvolved motorist which kills an unrestrained four-year old child from head injuries sustained. You can bet this cop is toast, even though the neglect of the van driver and the criminal actions of the fleeing perp are pretty much more responsible, the typical Hoosier mindset is to ignore all that, focus on the "killer cop" and throw him in prison, throw away his career, and the life of his family.

we can only chase violent felonies committed in our presence now :(

DaBigBR

09-21-2011, 21:58

It would depend on how bad it is. If it is a minor DWI? No. If it was really grossly negligent and you could tell that someone would die, maybe. You'd honestly have to get permission.

We don't like it. We know that if we let a drunk go because we can't chase and they kill someone in a wreck, that the department will lose big time. But it's not in our policy. If you did it, you'd honestly probably get a couple days off.

A department up my way had a similar policy...it was phrased "forcible felony in progress", which pretty much meant a hostage situation in the car. The irony of course now being that recent decisions have basically made felony eluding in to a forcible felony, but I digress. One of their officers put it to me this way: if I watched somebody, drunk as hell, run another cop over, I couldn't pursue."

They've since lightened up a little bit.

larry_minn

09-22-2011, 15:01

It would depend on how bad it is. If it is a minor DWI? No. If it was really grossly negligent and you could tell that someone would die, maybe. You'd honestly have to get permission.

We don't like it. We know that if we let a drunk go because we can't chase and they kill someone in a wreck, that the department will lose big time. But it's not in our policy. If you did it, you'd honestly probably get a couple days off.

So how do you know if its a "minor DWI"?? Do they weave/ride brakes harder when major DWI? Or does your dept require you to do a breathalizer first. :) :)
IMO the RUNNING from Police (when signaled to stop by lights/siren/other clearly understood means) is plenty reason to chase them down.

Then again I have felt major cities should have "Pursuit intervention" trucks. Take a one ton/larger truck/van, reinforce it and get it ahead of chase and use it to stop runner. (think road warrior idea) ;)

merlynusn

09-23-2011, 10:01

So how do you know if its a "minor DWI"?? Do they weave/ride brakes harder when major DWI? Or does your dept require you to do a breathalizer first. :) :)
IMO the RUNNING from Police (when signaled to stop by lights/siren/other clearly understood means) is plenty reason to chase them down.

Then again I have felt major cities should have "Pursuit intervention" trucks. Take a one ton/larger truck/van, reinforce it and get it ahead of chase and use it to stop runner. (think road warrior idea) ;)

I mean minor like minor weaving. One of those you know their drunk but it's not the grossly drunk like weaving across 4 lanes and hitting the shoulder on both sides of the road kind.

razdog76

09-23-2011, 10:17

I mean minor like minor weaving. One of those you know their drunk but it's not the grossly drunk like weaving across 4 lanes and hitting the shoulder on both sides of the road kind.

So how do you explain why you did not keep trying to get them stopped to the surviving family of the person in a vehicle that creamed from a head on collision by the offender?

That is what pursuit termination techniques are for. If you don't have the training and policy in place, you need it.

So how do you explain why you did not keep trying to get them stopped to the surviving family of the person in a vehicle that creamed from a head on collision by the offender?

That is what pursuit termination techniques are for. If you don't have the training and policy in place, you need it.

The only PTT we have are stop sticks. Can't do the PIT. They have said they want to give us the training and have had the cars set up to train for it for over a year, but no classes.

I wouldn't be explaining it. The department will be. And believe me, we all agree that it opens up everyone to liability because that car should be stopped. But we can't even throw the stop sticks unless we can chase the vehicle. Our pursuit policy is very restrictive. They are more concerned about liability with us wrecking in a pursuit than they are about the DWI hitting someone because we can't chase.

9L82

09-25-2011, 10:24

If the courts would start locking up people who flee, it might make a difference. It is very rare that anyone who starts a pursuit ends up serving even a day in jail. The judges and politicians run their mouths when a tragedy occurs, but then do nothing to take action against those who are responsible.

Make it a mandatory 5 years in prison and see if most don't stop.

9L82

09-25-2011, 10:27

Speaking as a brass wearer, I see pursuits as a necessary evil. You cannot handcuff your officers to a point that they are ineffectual. Train them well and have very clear policies and good bosses who monitor and terminate when appropriate. Catching bad guys is often dangerous, society needs to decide whether they want the police to catch criminals or just drive around waving at people.

texmex

09-27-2011, 09:52

Austin chased a bank robber up here in 2009. He wrecked out and came out of the vehicle with a gun to his female passengers head. A Wilco Lt. Shot him in the face. He survived. The female turned out to be his girlfriend. He got 60 years for robbing a bank in Corpus Christi. He got 75 years for robbing the bank in Austin. He got 99 years in Williamson County for Evading Arrest. The last three pursuits I've been involved in ended with the driver being shot (none fatal). The moral of the story is don't run from the law in Williamson County.